Forgot to close flight plan

[Paul Folbrecht]

Ok, I did it today, first time ever, after ferrying my newly purchased
152 home. I realized about an hour after landing that I'd forgotten. I
called the FSS and they'd informed me that they'd called the tower who
had confirmed my landing and thus the plan had been closed. I felt like
a complete ass.

How big a deal is this? I'm afraid to ask anybody at my FBO. I'm not
gonna get a letter am I??

[Paul Tomblin]

In a previous article, Paul Folbrecht > said:
>How big a deal is this? I'm afraid to ask anybody at my FBO. I'm not
>gonna get a letter am I??

Not a big deal. I've done it twice and never heard another word about it.


--
Paul Tomblin > http://xcski.com/blogs/pt/
Progress (n.): The process through which Usenet has evolved from
smart people in front of dumb terminals to dumb people in front
of smart terminals. --

[John Harper]

It's no big deal at all. Obviously you shouldn't do it but
nothing bad will happen, and you'll remember next time.
Maybe the time after that too, but eventually you'll forget
again.

Only time I ever did it (I rarely use VFR flight plans)
was at Furnace Creek. When I remembered, they'd sent
the local representative of the law to the airport.

John

"Paul Folbrecht" > wrote in message
...
> Ok, I did it today, first time ever, after ferrying my newly purchased
> 152 home. I realized about an hour after landing that I'd forgotten. I
> called the FSS and they'd informed me that they'd called the tower who
> had confirmed my landing and thus the plan had been closed. I felt like
> a complete ass.
>
> How big a deal is this? I'm afraid to ask anybody at my FBO. I'm not
> gonna get a letter am I??
>

[Steven P. McNicoll]

"Paul Folbrecht" > wrote in message
...
>
> Ok, I did it today, first time ever, after ferrying my newly purchased
> 152 home. I realized about an hour after landing that I'd forgotten. I
> called the FSS and they'd informed me that they'd called the tower who
> had confirmed my landing and thus the plan had been closed. I felt like
> a complete ass.
>
> How big a deal is this? I'm afraid to ask anybody at my FBO. I'm not
> gonna get a letter am I??
>

It's not that big a deal. If you're overdue and your flight plan
destination is a controlled field the first thing FSS does is call the
tower. If the tower says you arrived the search ends right there.

[Paul Folbrecht]

Thanks to all who responded thus far. Let's end this thread.

(Guess the cosmetic surgery and name change this afternoon were a bit of
overkill. Oh well.)

Paul Folbrecht wrote:

> Ok, I did it today, first time ever, after ferrying my newly purchased
> 152 home. I realized about an hour after landing that I'd forgotten. I
> called the FSS and they'd informed me that they'd called the tower who
> had confirmed my landing and thus the plan had been closed. I felt like
> a complete ass.
>
> How big a deal is this? I'm afraid to ask anybody at my FBO. I'm not
> gonna get a letter am I??
>

[BTIZ]

The first step when a flight plan is not closed (overdue) is a
communications search. It's easy.. check the tower on the destination field.
If no tower or tower is closed, check the FBO or local approach control to
see if they remember you.
They may even call the phone number you leave on the flight plan. I give my
last name and "on file with name of FBO".

If that fails, a ramp check, the local police will be dispatched to check
every aircraft on the ramp for your tail number. If it's in a closed hanger
that makes it tougher. Meanwhile a query may be made to the ELT monitoring
agencies for any thing along your route of flight.

Of course, now your N-number is "remembered" by the FSS. It is possible that
if a pattern develops you may be visited by the local FSDO. If a search is
launched that may turn out to be unwarranted, you may receive a bill for it
as a reminder to close the flight plan.

Normally a pilot remembers after the once, you did call in an hour late,
they normally give you 30 min before they called the tower.

BT

"Paul Folbrecht" > wrote in message
...
> Ok, I did it today, first time ever, after ferrying my newly purchased
> 152 home. I realized about an hour after landing that I'd forgotten. I
> called the FSS and they'd informed me that they'd called the tower who
> had confirmed my landing and thus the plan had been closed. I felt like
> a complete ass.
>
> How big a deal is this? I'm afraid to ask anybody at my FBO. I'm not
> gonna get a letter am I??
>

[kat]

im in australia but same things happen.
ive somehow forgotten twice...both times they rang the number on the
flight plan (flight school) and figured out i had forgotten. i now have
a piece of paper with "Close Flightplan" written on it that i stick
onto my steering wheel before i go flying. it has saved me from
forgetting about 4 times...


--
kat
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted via OziPilots Online [ http://www.OziPilotsOnline.com.au ]
- A website for Australian Pilots regardless of when, why, or what they fly -

[Cub Driver]

>i now have
>a piece of paper with "Close Flightplan" written on it that i stick
>onto my steering wheel

Change wris****ch from left hand to right :)

all the best -- Dan Ford
email: -- put Cubdriver in subject line!

see the Warbird's Forum at www.warbirdforum.com
and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com

[Paul Tomblin]

In a previous article, kat > said:
>flight plan (flight school) and figured out i had forgotten. i now have
>a piece of paper with "Close Flightplan" written on it that i stick
>onto my steering wheel before i go flying. it has saved me from
>forgetting about 4 times...

I file IFR now. That way somebody else closes it.


--
Paul Tomblin > http://xcski.com/blogs/pt/
The average banker could benefit tremendously from a good kick to
the head at precisely-timed intervals
-- Dan Holdsworth

[Tom Sixkiller]

"Paul Folbrecht" > wrote in message
...
> Thanks to all who responded thus far. Let's end this thread.
>
> (Guess the cosmetic surgery and name change this afternoon were a bit of
> overkill. Oh well.)
>

Are you running for President?

[Tom Sixkiller]

"Cub Driver" > wrote in message
...
>
> >i now have
> >a piece of paper with "Close Flightplan" written on it that i stick
> >onto my steering wheel
>
> Change wris****ch from left hand to right :)

A couple of my favorite airports have a sign at the exit saying "Have you
closed your flight plan?"

They should have another one a few feet past that one that says "DOH!!"

[Bob Chilcoat]

At least your scheduled sex change hadn't been done yet.

--
Bob (Chief Pilot, White Knuckle Airways)


"Tom Sixkiller" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Paul Folbrecht" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Thanks to all who responded thus far. Let's end this thread.
> >
> > (Guess the cosmetic surgery and name change this afternoon were a bit of
> > overkill. Oh well.)
> >
>
> Are you running for President?
>
>

[C J Campbell]

"Paul Tomblin" > wrote in message
...
> In a previous article, kat > said:
> >flight plan (flight school) and figured out i had forgotten. i now have
> >a piece of paper with "Close Flightplan" written on it that i stick
> >onto my steering wheel before i go flying. it has saved me from
> >forgetting about 4 times...
>
> I file IFR now. That way somebody else closes it.

Hah! You would think so, but I, um, have a friend who has forgotten to close
his IFR flight plan after flying into an uncontrolled field that is out of
radio contact with ATC. :-)

[Steven P. McNicoll]

"C J Campbell" > wrote in message
...
>
> Hah! You would think so, but I, um, have a friend who has forgotten
> to close his IFR flight plan after flying into an uncontrolled field that
is
> out of radio contact with ATC. :-)
>

Why would one think that someone else would close the flight plan?

[C J Campbell]

"Steven P. McNicoll" > wrote in message
ink.net...
>
> "C J Campbell" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > Hah! You would think so, but I, um, have a friend who has forgotten
> > to close his IFR flight plan after flying into an uncontrolled field
that
> is
> > out of radio contact with ATC. :-)
> >
>
> Why would one think that someone else would close the flight plan?
>
>

I don't know why Mr. Tomblin thought that, but my 'friend' simply forgot.

[Newps]

Paul Folbrecht wrote:
> Ok, I did it today, first time ever, after ferrying my newly purchased
> 152 home. I realized about an hour after landing that I'd forgotten. I
> called the FSS and they'd informed me that they'd called the tower who
> had confirmed my landing and thus the plan had been closed. I felt like
> a complete ass.
>
> How big a deal is this?

Not very big if you land at an airport with a tower.


I'm afraid to ask anybody at my FBO.

The FBO will never know as the first call from FSS will always be to the
tower. If there is no tower then they will call the FBO.


I'm not
> gonna get a letter am I??

Nope, you'll never hear another thing about it.

[Steven P. McNicoll]

"C J Campbell" > wrote in message
...
>
> I don't know why Mr. Tomblin thought that, but my 'friend' simply forgot.
>

Mr. Tomblin said he files IFR because somebody else closes the flight plan
that way, it was you that wrote; "Hah! You would think so, ..."

[dfdffsdf]

First of all, it is spelled hangAr.

Second of all, simply put your car keys (and cell phone) in a Ziploc bag
with a 3x5 card inside saying "close your flight plan". The first thing
a person does usually when done putting away the plane is drive home
and/or call family.

Finally, consider using flight following, much better system than flight
plans, unless you live in Alaska.



"BTIZ" > wrote in
news:Du7bc.68102$1I5.37597@fed1read01:

> The first step when a flight plan is not closed (overdue) is a
> communications search. It's easy.. check the tower on the destination
> field. If no tower or tower is closed, check the FBO or local approach
> control to see if they remember you.
> They may even call the phone number you leave on the flight plan. I
> give my last name and "on file with name of FBO".
>
> If that fails, a ramp check, the local police will be dispatched to
> check every aircraft on the ramp for your tail number. If it's in a
> closed hanger that makes it tougher. Meanwhile a query may be made to
> the ELT monitoring agencies for any thing along your route of flight.
>
> Of course, now your N-number is "remembered" by the FSS. It is
> possible that if a pattern develops you may be visited by the local
> FSDO. If a search is launched that may turn out to be unwarranted, you
> may receive a bill for it as a reminder to close the flight plan.
>
> Normally a pilot remembers after the once, you did call in an hour
> late, they normally give you 30 min before they called the tower.
>
> BT
>
> "Paul Folbrecht" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Ok, I did it today, first time ever, after ferrying my newly
>> purchased 152 home. I realized about an hour after landing that I'd
>> forgotten. I called the FSS and they'd informed me that they'd
>> called the tower who had confirmed my landing and thus the plan had
>> been closed. I felt like a complete ass.
>>
>> How big a deal is this? I'm afraid to ask anybody at my FBO. I'm
>> not gonna get a letter am I??
>>
>
>

[Newps]

dfdffsdf wrote:

> First of all, it is spelled hangAr.
>
> Second of all, simply put your car keys (and cell phone) in a Ziploc bag
> with a 3x5 card inside saying "close your flight plan". The first thing
> a person does usually when done putting away the plane is drive home
> and/or call family.



Does this mean I have to take the plane key off my car key ring? No way
the phone goes in the bag, it gets plugged into the intercom so I can
use it during the flight.

[Orval Fairbairn]

In article <mPobc.63787$JO3.38726@attbi_s04>,
Newps > wrote:

> dfdffsdf wrote:
>
> > First of all, it is spelled hangAr.
> >
> > Second of all, simply put your car keys (and cell phone) in a Ziploc bag
> > with a 3x5 card inside saying "close your flight plan". The first thing
> > a person does usually when done putting away the plane is drive home
> > and/or call family.
>
>
>
> Does this mean I have to take the plane key off my car key ring? No way
> the phone goes in the bag, it gets plugged into the intercom so I can
> use it during the flight.
>

It is illegal to use cell phones in flight (unless in an emergency). It
has to do with the phone at altitude activating multiple cellphone
receivers at once.

[Nathan D. Olmscheid]

Not True.

-Nathan



Orval Fairbairn > wrote in

et:


>
> It is illegal to use cell phones in flight (unless in an emergency).
> It has to do with the phone at altitude activating multiple cellphone
> receivers at once.
>

[BTIZ]

hey dfdff.. is that how you spell your name...

BT

"dfdffsdf" > wrote in message
...
>
> First of all, it is spelled hangAr.
>

[BTIZ]

he did not say to use the cell phone in flight, he said digging for his keys
he'll see the note with the reminder to use his cell to CANCEL his flight
plan, one can ASSUME that this means if he needs car keys he is on the
ground

and old analog cell phones had that problem...
come on up to the digital age.. no problem with multiple cell towers..

BT

"Orval Fairbairn" > wrote in message
...
> In article <mPobc.63787$JO3.38726@attbi_s04>,
> Newps > wrote:
>
> > dfdffsdf wrote:
> >
> > > First of all, it is spelled hangAr.
> > >
> > > Second of all, simply put your car keys (and cell phone) in a Ziploc
bag
> > > with a 3x5 card inside saying "close your flight plan". The first
thing
> > > a person does usually when done putting away the plane is drive home
> > > and/or call family.
> >
> >
> >
> > Does this mean I have to take the plane key off my car key ring? No way
> > the phone goes in the bag, it gets plugged into the intercom so I can
> > use it during the flight.
> >
>
> It is illegal to use cell phones in flight (unless in an emergency). It
> has to do with the phone at altitude activating multiple cellphone
> receivers at once.

[BTIZ]

tie string on finger..

now what was that string for?

BT

"Cub Driver" > wrote in message
...
>
> >i now have
> >a piece of paper with "Close Flightplan" written on it that i stick
> >onto my steering wheel
>
> Change wris****ch from left hand to right :)
>
> all the best -- Dan Ford
> email: -- put Cubdriver in subject line!
>
> see the Warbird's Forum at www.warbirdforum.com
> and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com

[BTIZ]

if you are IFR and complete an IFR approach to a "towered" filed, when the
tower is open, the TOWER automatically cancels your IFR when you taxi clear
of the runway

BT

"Steven P. McNicoll" > wrote in message
ink.net...
>
> "C J Campbell" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > I don't know why Mr. Tomblin thought that, but my 'friend' simply
forgot.
> >
>
> Mr. Tomblin said he files IFR because somebody else closes the flight plan
> that way, it was you that wrote; "Hah! You would think so, ..."
>
>

[Steven P. McNicoll]

"BTIZ" > wrote in message
news:BNqbc.69609$1I5.28721@fed1read01...
>
> he did not say to use the cell phone in flight, he said digging for his
keys
> he'll see the note with the reminder to use his cell to CANCEL his flight
> plan, one can ASSUME that this means if he needs car keys he is on the
> ground
>

He said; "No way the phone goes in the bag, it gets plugged into the
intercom so I can use it during the flight."

[Steven P. McNicoll]

"BTIZ" > wrote in message
news:HPqbc.69612$1I5.51059@fed1read01...
>
> if you are IFR and complete an IFR approach to a "towered" filed,
> when the tower is open, the TOWER automatically cancels your
> IFR when you taxi clear of the runway
>

If you are IFR and complete an IFR approach to a "towered" filed, when the
tower is open, the tower does nothing with regard to your IFR when you taxi
clear of the runway.

Mr. Tomblin said he files IFR because somebody else closes the flight plan
that way. Most fields do not have control towers.

[Don Tuite]

On Sat, 03 Apr 2004 03:40:42 GMT, Orval Fairbairn
> wrote:

>
>It is illegal to use cell phones in flight (unless in an emergency). It
>has to do with the phone at altitude activating multiple cellphone
>receivers at once.

Brother Natalie has posted numerous times that the FCC only cares
about the AMPS service. For the FAA and digital services, it's up to
the PIC to determine whether the phone interferes with the aircraft's
nav equipment.

cf:
http://www.google.com/groups?selm=3CC96B68.CEB3F1FD%40sensor.com&oe=UTF-8&output=gplain

Don

[Paul Tomblin]

In a previous article, "Steven P. McNicoll" > said:
>Mr. Tomblin said he files IFR because somebody else closes the flight plan
>that way. Most fields do not have control towers.

The ones I fly IFR to almost all do. And when I'm flying into
podunk-ville, so far the approach controller giving me a phone number is
sufficient memory prod that I haven't failed to call on my cell phone
while taxing to the tie downs.


--
Paul Tomblin > http://xcski.com/blogs/pt/
Nazis are part of *every* government, everywhere, in all of human
history. They're just not always called that.
-- J.D. Baldwin

[Steven P. McNicoll]

"Paul Tomblin" > wrote in message
...
>
> The ones I fly IFR to almost all do. And when I'm flying into
> podunk-ville, so far the approach controller giving me a phone number is
> sufficient memory prod that I haven't failed to call on my cell phone
> while taxing to the tie downs.
>

In other words, your statement is not correct in all cases, which makes it
an incorrect statement.

[Cockpit Colin]

My "trick" was to write "Cancel Flight Plan" on a small plastic baggage
tag - attach it to a small bull clip with a small split ring - the clip it
onto the aircraft overhead door lock/release.

It's never failed me yet.

[Newps]

Orval Fairbairn wrote:

>>Does this mean I have to take the plane key off my car key ring? No way
>>the phone goes in the bag, it gets plugged into the intercom so I can
>>use it during the flight.
>>
>
>
> It is illegal to use cell phones in flight (unless in an emergency). It
> has to do with the phone at altitude activating multiple cellphone
> receivers at once.

That's funny.

[Newps]

BTIZ wrote:

> he did not say to use the cell phone in flight,

Although I do, all the time. That's why it's plumbed into the headset
with the Cellset.


>
> and old analog cell phones had that problem...
> come on up to the digital age.. no problem with multiple cell towers..

Verizon offers the Pilot Mycast that allows you to download TAF's,
Metars, Radar and other cool stuff while enroute.

[S Narayan]

"Paul Tomblin" > wrote in message
...
> In a previous article, Paul Folbrecht >
said:
> >How big a deal is this? I'm afraid to ask anybody at my FBO. I'm not
> >gonna get a letter am I??
>
> Not a big deal. I've done it twice and never heard another word about it.
>

Depends. I forgot to do it once at a remote airport without tower. I
realised about an hour later and called in to close the FP and they told me
they were trying to find me and had asked other pilots about my aircraft.
Fortunately a full scale search had not developed. Glad I called in and
checked with the FSS. Felt like an ass. So, it could be an inconvenience to
ATC and other pilots, so don't take this lightly.

[Paul Tomblin]

In a previous article, "S Narayan" > said:
>Depends. I forgot to do it once at a remote airport without tower. I
>realised about an hour later and called in to close the FP and they told me

One time I was flying to Saranac Lake, and I decided at the last minute
(after losing flight following) to do a bit of a scenic flyby of the Lake
Placid area before landing. I didn't think I was an hour past my ETA, but
I must have been because I heard a call on Saranac Lake's CTAF asking if I
was on the frequency, and when I said I was, the caller said that FSS had
called the FBO to see if I was there because I hadn't closed my flight
plan.


--
Paul Tomblin > http://xcski.com/blogs/pt/
Your mouse has moved. Windows NT must be restarted for the change to
take effect. Reboot now? [ OK ]

[Steven P. McNicoll]

"S Narayan" > wrote in message
...
>
> Depends. I forgot to do it once at a remote airport without tower. I
> realised about an hour later and called in to close the FP and they told
me
> they were trying to find me and had asked other pilots about my aircraft.
> Fortunately a full scale search had not developed. Glad I called in and
> checked with the FSS. Felt like an ass. So, it could be an inconvenience
> to ATC and other pilots, so don't take this lightly.
>

He's talking about a VFR flight plan. There's no connection between control
towers and VFR flight plans, ATC wouldn't even know if you had filed a VFR
flight plan or not.

[S Narayan]

"Steven P. McNicoll" > wrote in message
link.net...
>
> "S Narayan" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > Depends. I forgot to do it once at a remote airport without tower. I
> > realised about an hour later and called in to close the FP and they told
> me
> > they were trying to find me and had asked other pilots about my
aircraft.
> > Fortunately a full scale search had not developed. Glad I called in and
> > checked with the FSS. Felt like an ass. So, it could be an inconvenience
> > to ATC and other pilots, so don't take this lightly.
> >
>
> He's talking about a VFR flight plan. There's no connection between
control
> towers and VFR flight plans, ATC wouldn't even know if you had filed a VFR
> flight plan or not.

I know, ATC gets involved when FSS requests ATC to find the missing pilot.
The field may be completed unattended as in my case (Trinity Center, CA) and
FSS has no way to find out if the pilot made it safely. ATC then contacts
other pilots who are flying in to to the same airport after that missing
pilot (or divert other pilot(s), if willing, to check at that airport). It
is one of few times when filing a FP is a boon and a curse.

[vincent p. norris]

> I didn't think I was an hour past my ETA, but I must have been
>because I heard a call on Saranac Lake's CTAF asking if I
>was on the frequency,...

You may not have been. Twenty or thirty years ago I landed at
Hastings, NB, at my ETA. But when I strolled into the FSS to close my
flight plan, I was surprised to hear a guy sitting there calling my
number into his mike.

I was glad to see him taking his job seriously. ((:-))

vince norris

[Teacherjh]

>>
If you are IFR and complete an IFR approach to a "towered" filed, when the
tower is open, the tower does nothing with regard to your IFR when you taxi
clear of the runway.
<<

in the US, IFR flight plans are closed automatically sometime after the flight
is completed, when the flight is completed at a towered airport when the tower
is open.

How does this happen? (real question)

Jose

--
(for Email, make the obvious changes in my address)

[Steven P. McNicoll]

"Teacherjh" > wrote in message
...
>
> in the US, IFR flight plans are closed automatically sometime after
> the flight is completed, when the flight is completed at a towered
> airport when the tower is open.
>
> How does this happen? (real question)
>

It happens by arriving at your destination. If you didn't arrive at your
destination a search would be initiated. Because you did arrive nothing
needs to be done.

[Teacherjh]

>>
It happens by arriving at your destination. If you didn't arrive at your
destination a search would be initiated. Because you did arrive nothing
needs to be done.
<<

By arriving... by when? I ask because until you have arrived, you haven't
arrived. Action is triggered by action, not by inaction. So, if inaction (not
arriving) is the cause, then the proximate cause must be something like a timer
going off.

It is this detail I'm looking for.

Jose

--
(for Email, make the obvious changes in my address)

[Steven P. McNicoll]

"Teacherjh" > wrote in message
...
> >>
> It happens by arriving at your destination. If you didn't arrive at your
> destination a search would be initiated. Because you did arrive nothing
> needs to be done.
> <<
>
> By arriving... by when?
>

By the time forwarded to the tower.


>
> I ask because until you have arrived, you haven't arrived.
>

That's deep.


>
> Action is triggered by action, not by inaction.
>

Not in this case.


>
> So, if inaction (not arriving) is the cause, then the proximate cause
> must be something like a timer going off.
>

Why?


>
> It is this detail I'm looking for.
>

There is no more detail.

[Teacherjh]

>>
> By arriving... by when?

By the time forwarded to the tower.

> So, if inaction (not arriving) is the cause, then the proximate cause
> must be something like a timer going off.

Why?
<<

To give meaning to the part that says "by the time forwarded to the tower".

The tower is sent an "expect arrival at 5:34". At 5:36 the plane arrives.
What is different about the two minutes after 5:34 compared to the two minutes
before 5:34? Just that at 5:34, 5:34 happened, and that is special because it
is an expected arrival time that was not consummated.

So, at least in somebody's mind, an alarm went off at 5:34. No? Otherwise
there is nothing special about the two minutes afterwards, and no search would
be initiated.

That is, unless what you mean is that a search begins any time a handoff fails
under IFR. This is another reasonable interpretation, when "handoff" is
expanded to include "expected position report". But then, each ETA (EPRT)
would function as the "alarm" I am talking about... getting reset every time.

Is this pretty much the way it happens?

Jose

--
(for Email, make the obvious changes in my address)

[Newps]

Teacherjh wrote:


> The tower is sent an "expect arrival at 5:34".

It will be printed on a flight progress strip.


At 5:36 the plane arrives.
> What is different about the two minutes after 5:34 compared to the two minutes
> before 5:34?

None. Make it 20 minutes, still no difference.


Just that at 5:34, 5:34 happened, and that is special because it
> is an expected arrival time that was not consummated.

But if you landed at 5:36, where were you at 5:34? Say about 3 miles
out? Think the tower might know that? Think the approach controller
might know that?


>
> So, at least in somebody's mind, an alarm went off at 5:34. No?

No, no alarm went off because we knew exactly where you were.


Otherwise
> there is nothing special about the two minutes afterwards, and no search would
> be initiated.

Right.
>
> That is, unless what you mean is that a search begins any time a handoff fails
> under IFR.

Handoffs fail for any number of reasons. Like your cheap ass
transponder isn't sending a signal right now so I can't take the handoff
from the center because my computer won't take handoffs like that.
Modem failure. Other telephone line failure. You're too low for my
radar coverage. If the you are still in radio contact with ATC then we
don't need to go look for you. If all the electrics fail we'll do a
manual handoff. And when you land we will do exactly nothing, except
file the strip. Because nothing needs to be done. You're here and ATC
knows that.


This is another reasonable interpretation, when "handoff" is
> expanded to include "expected position report".

That's not a handoff.


But then, each ETA (EPRT)
> would function as the "alarm" I am talking about... getting reset every time.

If center has no radar with you they will ask for position reports.
When you fail to report he will call you on the radio. If you don't
answer he will start a search.

[Peter Duniho]

"Teacherjh" > wrote in message
...
> So, at least in somebody's mind, an alarm went off at 5:34. No?
Otherwise
> there is nothing special about the two minutes afterwards, and no search
would
> be initiated.

AFAIK, the search & rescue aspect is the same for IFR and VFR. ATC has
nothing to do with it, except that when an IFR flight arrives at a towered
airport, the controller contacts the FSS (who is the entity waiting for the
"timer to go off") to close the IFR flight plan on the pilot's behalf.

> That is, unless what you mean is that a search begins any time a handoff
fails
> under IFR.

AFAIK, a failed handoff doesn't *automatically* start a search. ATC may in
fact prompt a search to begin if the loss of communications is accompanied
by some other evidence that there was an accident. Otherwise, normal lost
comm procedures would prevail, which basically just mean ATC clears the
route filed and/or cleared. Thirty minutes after the filed arrival time, if
the aircraft hasn't shown up and the FSS hasn't been told to close the
flight plan, *then* search & rescue would begin.

Pete

[Steven P. McNicoll]

"Peter Duniho" > wrote in message
...
>
> AFAIK, the search & rescue aspect is the same for IFR and VFR.
> ATC has nothing to do with it, except that when an IFR flight arrives
> at a towered airport, the controller contacts the FSS (who is the
> entity waiting for the "timer to go off") to close the IFR flight plan
> on the pilot's behalf.
>

That's not correct. When an IFR flight arrives at a towered airport, the
controller contacts nobody, for there's nobody to contact. FSS is not an
entity waiting for any "timer to go off" to close an IFR flight plan. When
an IFR flight arrives at a nontowered airport, the pilot either contacts ATC
directly or has FSS contact ATC for him. FSS just relays the message, they
do not close the flight plan.

[Steven P. McNicoll]

"Teacherjh" > wrote in message
...
>
> To give meaning to the part that says "by the time forwarded to
> the tower".
>

Explain.


>
> The tower is sent an "expect arrival at 5:34". At 5:36 the plane arrives.
> What is different about the two minutes after 5:34 compared to the two >
minutes before 5:34? Just that at 5:34, 5:34 happened, and that is
> special because it is an expected arrival time that was not
> consummated.
>
> So, at least in somebody's mind, an alarm went off at 5:34. No?
>

No. An airplane that had been estimated to land at 5:34, but didn't
actually land until 5:36, would be on tower frequency by 5:34, so the tower
would know where it is.

If the forwarded estimate was off by more than three minutes the facility
providing IFR services would revise the estimate.



>
> That is, unless what you mean is that a search begins any time a
> handoff fails under IFR. This is another reasonable interpretation,
> when "handoff" is expanded to include "expected position report".
>

I mean what I wrote, a handoff is a radar function and has nothing to do
with it.


>
> But then, each ETA (EPRT) would function as the "alarm" I am
> talking about... getting reset every time.
>
> Is this pretty much the way it happens?
>

Estimates are revised regularly. Sometimes they just take the form of a
time change at a specific fix, sometimes a new strip is generated.

[Teacherjh]

> To give meaning to the part that says "by the time forwarded to
> the tower".
>

Explain.

Rather than explain, let me ask how a search is begun for an aircraft that does
not land when it is expected to. Say you hand off to the tower, and the
aircraft does not contact the tower. The plane is below radar. A few minutes
go by, then a few more, and still no contact. Perhaps the airplane has been
abudcted by aliens, or has crashed in the forest, or has had an electrical
failure, or the nut behind the yoke came off. So, what happens? When?
Triggered by what? Why?

Same question, nontowered.

Jose

--
(for Email, make the obvious changes in my address)

[Peter Duniho]

"Teacherjh" > wrote in message
...
> Rather than explain, let me ask how a search is begun for an aircraft that
does
> not land when it is expected to.

IMHO, it was obvious that was your question from the get-go.

You should find a controller who is more interested in actually answering
your question than in telling you that you're wrong (whatever it happens you
said). Steve is not that controller. You should know that by now.

Pete

[Steven P. McNicoll]

"Teacherjh" > wrote in message
...
>
> Rather than explain, let me ask how a search is begun for an
> aircraft that does not land when it is expected to. Say you
> hand off to the tower, and the aircraft does not contact the
> tower. The plane is below radar.
>

There are no handoffs without radar.


>
> A few minutes go by, then a few more, and still no contact.
> Perhaps the airplane has been abudcted by aliens, or has crashed
> in the forest, or has had an electrical failure, or the nut behind the
> yoke came off. So, what happens?
>

The tower calls the facility providing IFR services.


>
> When?
>

A few minutes after the time that was passed to the tower.


>
> Triggered by what?
>

Non-contact with the aircraft.


>
> Why?
>

Because there should have been contact by that time.


>
> Same question, nontowered.
>

Usually the first step is to call the FBO.

[Newps]

Peter Duniho wrote:

>
> AFAIK, the search & rescue aspect is the same for IFR and VFR. ATC has
> nothing to do with it, except that when an IFR flight arrives at a towered
> airport, the controller contacts the FSS (who is the entity waiting for the
> "timer to go off") to close the IFR flight plan on the pilot's behalf.

That's funny, a tower calling FSS to cancel an IFR flight plan.

[Newps]

Teacherjh wrote:


>
> Rather than explain, let me ask how a search is begun for an aircraft that does
> not land when it is expected to.

If you don't call in to cancel your flight plan then S&R is started.


Say you hand off to the tower, and the
> aircraft does not contact the tower.

Happens every day. Lots of times I'll just let you land without a
clearance. You'll never do that again.


The plane is below radar. A few minutes
> go by, then a few more, and still no contact. Perhaps the airplane has been
> abudcted by aliens, or has crashed in the forest, or has had an electrical
> failure, or the nut behind the yoke came off. So, what happens? When?
> Triggered by what? Why?

S&R is started when you don't arrive.


>
> Same question, nontowered.
>

S&R is started when you don't cancel your flight plan.

[Teacherjh]

>> S&R is started when you don't arrive.

Well, here's the detail I'm looking for: How do they know you don't arrive -
they have to be told that you will. How do they know when you will arrive -
they have to be told the time to expect you. So, "some time" goes by and you
haven't arrived. S&R is started.

How much time is "some time"? (I'm not asking for an exact number - I'm well
aware that it may not exist).

And the "action" in this case is being told that you will arrive, and "some
time" going by without an arrival. Yes?

Jose

--
(for Email, make the obvious changes in my address)

[Peter Duniho]

"Newps" > wrote in message
news:zNIdc.2628$rg5.27162@attbi_s52...
> That's funny, a tower calling FSS to cancel an IFR flight plan.

It's only funny to an asshole who takes pleasure in laughing at other people
who don't know the inner workings of job functions for which they have no
need to know the inner workings.

Most likely, neither you nor Steve would know answers to these sorts of
questions if it weren't for the fact that you are controllers and being able
to do your job, and the FAA, require you to know the answers. I know you
don't care that you both come across as big honking jerks when you
criticize, make fun of, and otherwise belittle folks when you could instead
simply provide the actual answers to questions being asked. But the fact
remains that you do.

Now to me, THAT is funny. To each his own, I guess.

Pete

[Steven P. McNicoll]

"Peter Duniho" > wrote in message
...
>
> It's only funny to an asshole who takes pleasure in laughing at
> other people who don't know the inner workings of job functions
> for which they have no need to know the inner workings.
>

So if you don't know the inner workings of job functions for which you have
no need to know the inner workings, why do you post on the inner workings of
these job functions?

[Newps]

Teacherjh wrote:

>>>S&R is started when you don't arrive.
>
>
> Well, here's the detail I'm looking for: How do they know you don't arrive -
> they have to be told that you will. How do they know when you will arrive -
> they have to be told the time to expect you. So, "some time" goes by and you
> haven't arrived. S&R is started.
>
> How much time is "some time"? (I'm not asking for an exact number - I'm well
> aware that it may not exist).

If the tower has a flight strip printer and no radar you know exactly
when he will arrive because of the time printed on the strip. At about
ten miles out the center will tell that aircraft to contact tower. If
you don't contact tower at or before your expected landing time the
tower will call the center and ask about the aircraft. It will become
immediately clear during that conversation where the airplane is. If
the tower has no printer the center will call the tower with all
inbounds and give the same time as the computer would have.


>
> And the "action" in this case is being told that you will arrive, and "some
> time" going by without an arrival. Yes?

Yes.

[Kevin Darling]

Here's another good reason to close your flight plan right away : if
you're flying a plane that is shared by others.

On my first x-ctry solo flight, I called to open my flight plan from A
to B. The FSS person kept saying they couldn't do that, because the
plane was already registered on a flight plan from B to A.

There were a couple of minutes of confusion, when suddenly I
remembered that I had taken off only about 15 minutes after the last
student had landed from his own solo x-ctry. So I keyed the mike and
said "Hey, I think the last student didn't close his plan yet." FSS
came back right away and laughed, "Okay, that did it. I closed his
out and yours came up!"

Whew! I almost turned back because of that.

Kev

[Newps]

Kevin Darling wrote:


>
> Whew! I almost turned back because of that.

What?

[Kevin Darling]

Newps > wrote in message news:<6r2ec.8091$wP1.27188@attbi_s54>...
> Kevin Darling wrote:
> > Whew! I almost turned back because of that.
>
> What?

Because I thought you had to have a flight plan filed for a x-ctry to count :-)

[Brad Z]

"Kevin Darling" > wrote in message
> Because I thought you had to have a flight plan filed for a x-ctry to
count :-)

....and your logbook signed at the destination.

[Greg Copeland]

On Sun, 04 Apr 2004 07:10:17 +1200, Cockpit Colin wrote:

> My "trick" was to write "Cancel Flight Plan" on a small plastic baggage
> tag - attach it to a small bull clip with a small split ring - the clip it
> onto the aircraft overhead door lock/release.
>
> It's never failed me yet.

And the tower can read the tag with binoculars? Seems they still are not
going to be happy to have to read it, to close it. ;) :)

[Steven P. McNicoll]

"Greg Copeland" > wrote in message
...
>
> And the tower can read the tag with binoculars? Seems they still
> are not going to be happy to have to read it, to close it. ;) :)
>

The tower doesn't have to read it.

[Greg Copeland]

On Fri, 02 Apr 2004 20:09:07 -0800, BTIZ wrote:

> he did not say to use the cell phone in flight, he said digging for his keys
> he'll see the note with the reminder to use his cell to CANCEL his flight
> plan, one can ASSUME that this means if he needs car keys he is on the
> ground
>
> and old analog cell phones had that problem...
> come on up to the digital age.. no problem with multiple cell towers..

Hmmm. Care to provide some information which can support that statement?
Last I heard, cell companies have been actively lobbying to make it
illegal because it leverages far too many cell resources. On the ground,
your average cell phone will contact between 1 and 4 cells at any given
time. In the air, last I heard, it could be twenty or more. It doesn't
take too many cell phones in the air to cause capacity issues. Even if
one assumes that towers can take primary responsibility for a call, the
rate of tower change (assuming you're moving) is still causing additional
capacity demands; I assume at any rate.

Lastly, digital and analog may be somewhat of a misnomer. Digital and
analog still have to be transmitted. Normally the distinction is how the
signal in question is encoded. I'm not sure how or why a cell tower is
going to say, "hey, this is digital, so I need to ignore the signal".
Otherwise, why wouldn't it ignore your calls too? Even with gps data
being encoded (to perhaps determine range), part of the capacity equation
is decoding. If the signal is being decoded, capacity is still be used,
even if once the signal is decoded, the cell decided to ignore it.

Please, feel free to provide additional details.

[Greg Copeland]

I assume the, "not true", part is in reference to the legality of it?



On Sat, 03 Apr 2004 03:44:26 +0000, Nathan D. Olmscheid wrote:

> Not True.
>
> -Nathan
>
>
>
> Orval Fairbairn > wrote in
>
> et:
>
>
>>
>> It is illegal to use cell phones in flight (unless in an emergency).
>> It has to do with the phone at altitude activating multiple cellphone
>> receivers at once.
>>

[Greg Copeland]

On Wed, 14 Apr 2004 19:59:55 +0000, Steven P. McNicoll wrote:

>
> "Greg Copeland" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> And the tower can read the tag with binoculars? Seems they still
>> are not going to be happy to have to read it, to close it. ;) :)
>>
>
> The tower doesn't have to read it.

That was a joke. Thusly the smilies that followed. ;)

[Steven P. McNicoll]

"Greg Copeland" > wrote in message
...
>
> That was a joke.
>

No it wasn't.

[Nathan D. Olmscheid]

Legality and the fact that the new systems are designed much differently.
My best friend is an engineer for Qwest Wireless division. (which is going
to be shut down as ATT is buying it I beleive) The new systems will not
activate multiple cell phone receivers at once. Old Cellular possibly, new
PCS digital networks....not true.



Greg Copeland > wrote in
:

> I assume the, "not true", part is in reference to the legality of it?
>
>
>
> On Sat, 03 Apr 2004 03:44:26 +0000, Nathan D. Olmscheid wrote:
>
>> Not True.
>>
>> -Nathan

[Greg Copeland]

On Wed, 14 Apr 2004 20:30:22 +0000, Steven P. McNicoll wrote:

>
> "Greg Copeland" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> That was a joke.
>>
>
> No it wasn't.

Hehe. I guess humor wasn't on your checklist.

Go figure.

[Greg Copeland]

On Wed, 14 Apr 2004 20:51:12 +0000, Nathan D. Olmscheid wrote:

> Legality and the fact that the new systems are designed much differently.
> My best friend is an engineer for Qwest Wireless division. (which is going
> to be shut down as ATT is buying it I beleive) The new systems will not
> activate multiple cell phone receivers at once. Old Cellular possibly, new
> PCS digital networks....not true.
>
>
>
> Greg Copeland > wrote in
> :
>
>> I assume the, "not true", part is in reference to the legality of it?
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sat, 03 Apr 2004 03:44:26 +0000, Nathan D. Olmscheid wrote:
>>
>>> Not True.
>>>
>>> -Nathan

Did he offer an explanation as to how it's able to prevent DSP'ing the
signal so as to prevent it from being processed as your signal jumps from
tower to tower?

I've read several papers which outline the capacity issues which is the
root of the current level of lobbying. To date, I've not read anything
which would indicate that this is not a problem. How was it resolved?

[Steven P. McNicoll]

"Greg Copeland" > wrote in message
...
>
> Hehe. I guess humor wasn't on your checklist.
>

I have an excellent sense of humor.

[Mary Shafer]

On Wed, 14 Apr 2004 21:47:39 GMT, "Steven P. McNicoll"
> wrote:

> "Greg Copeland" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > Hehe. I guess humor wasn't on your checklist.
>
> I have an excellent sense of humor.

Yeah, but keeping it stored away in the bottom drawer, wrapped in
tissue paper, isn't the same as showing it off on Usenet.

Mary

--
Mary Shafer Retired aerospace research engineer

[Steven P. McNicoll]

"Mary Shafer" > wrote in message
...
>
> Yeah, but keeping it stored away in the bottom drawer, wrapped in
> tissue paper, isn't the same as showing it off on Usenet.
>

I've never been one to show off.

[Paul Sengupta]

"Greg Copeland" > wrote in message
...
> On Fri, 02 Apr 2004 20:09:07 -0800, BTIZ wrote:
> > and old analog cell phones had that problem...
> > come on up to the digital age.. no problem with multiple cell towers..
>
> On the ground,
> your average cell phone will contact between 1 and 4 cells at any given
> time. In the air, last I heard, it could be twenty or more
> Lastly, digital and analog may be somewhat of a misnomer. Digital and
> analog still have to be transmitted.

We're implementing the 3G (UMTS) system for Vodafone. We've
been doing some drive testing for optimisation. On Tuesday evening
I took the drive testing kit up in the air with me and flew about 1500ft
in the Newbury area, up the A34 to the M4 and back over the town.

Interesting. I'd have loved to have put some traces on the network
to see the amount of signalling going on. There was absolute chaos
as far as the UE (mobile) was concerned, adding, deleting and
substituting radio links (soft and hard handover, WCDMA).

This was during voice calls. Next time I'll have to try data calls
(384kbps) and see what happens. Bit touchy now though since
Vodafone have launched their data service to the public.

Paul

[Teacherjh]

>> I have an excellent sense of humor.

Yanno, this thread is funnier than the joke that spawned it.

Jose

--
(for Email, make the obvious changes in my address)